Rick Woldenberg, CEO of educational toy company Learning Resources, is taking his case against former President Donald Trump’s tariffs to the U.S. Supreme Court. “I’m not willing to allow politicians to destroy what we have built over generations,” said Woldenberg, whose family business is based in the Chicago suburbs.
Within days of Trump announcing his sweeping “Liberation Day” tariffs in April, Woldenberg sought legal representation. He and attorneys from Akin Gump will argue the case Learning Resources v. Trump on Wednesday, alongside two related lawsuits challenging the legality of the tariffs. One is filed by Oregon and other Democratic-led states, while the other comes from the Liberty Justice Center, representing five small businesses including wine distributor V.O.S. Selections and another educational toy company, MicroKits.
The Supreme Court is being asked to act quickly, although rulings typically take months.
Small Businesses Lead the Fight
Large U.S. companies have largely stayed out of litigation, neither filing lawsuits nor submitting amicus briefs, which are often used to highlight a case’s wider significance. Instead, small businesses have stepped forward: about a dozen serve as plaintiffs in lawsuits against the tariffs, with another 700 joining an amicus brief from advocacy group We Pay The Tariffs.
Trump’s tariffs have hit small and medium-sized businesses hardest, according to John Horn, a professor at Washington University in St. Louis. Large companies can stockpile inventory and manage supply chains more effectively, whereas small businesses lack these resources and lobbying influence.
Woldenberg has spent millions on legal fees but considers it necessary. “Hundreds of thousands of U.S. businesses are similarly situated, but to my knowledge, I’m the only person suing using my own resources,” he said.
Legal Challenge Over Tariff Authority
The case centres on tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 (IEEPA), which was intended for national emergencies. Trump classified the U.S. trade deficit as a national emergency, even though deficits have persisted since 1975.
Tariffs announced on 2 April set a baseline of 10% on most imports, with higher rates up to 50% for certain countries. Lower courts have ruled the tariffs exceeded Trump’s authority under IEEPA. U.S. importers like Learning Resources, which manufactures most of its toys in Asia, bear the cost of these tariffs.
Business Impact
Woldenberg cut expansion plans to preserve cash, cancelling a 600,000-square-foot warehouse and office project for Learning Resources and related company hand2mind, abandoning plans to hire 30 new employees, and reducing marketing and training budgets. “I predicted we’d be smaller and make less money. Both proved true,” he said.
David Levi, founder of MicroKits in Virginia, has faced similar challenges. Trump’s tariffs on Chinese imports exceeded 100%, forcing Levi to slow production and reduce a part-time employee’s hours. Revenue, previously growing 30% annually, is expected to drop from a projected $1 million to $400,000 in 2025. Necessary electronic components are not available domestically at affordable prices. “With tariffs constantly changing, you can’t plan ahead,” Levi said.
Rallying Small Businesses
Levi joined the lawsuit after discovering Liberty Justice Center’s call for plaintiffs. “After our public call, we received an overwhelming response from small businesses nationwide,” said attorney Jeffrey Schwab. Five companies were selected whose experiences best illustrate the tariffs’ broad impact.
Victor Schwartz, president of V.O.S. Selections, described joining the case as a “moral imperative.” He estimates the tariffs have cost his wine distribution business $200,000. “I was shocked that those with more power and money did not step up,” Schwartz said.
The Supreme Court will hear arguments this week in a case that could have far-reaching consequences for presidential trade powers and small businesses across the United States.